From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Rapoport Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:07:20 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/5] smc911x: silence MAC mismatch warning In-Reply-To: <200911111022.15096.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <7026542a00db3f300044fa427984fa3c6f1f282d.1257861401.git.mike@compulab.co.il> <200911111022.15096.vapier@gentoo.org> Message-ID: <4AFAE138.9050504@compulab.co.il> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 11 November 2009 03:03:02 Mike Rapoport wrote: >> If there is no SROM attached to the SMSC chip it's MAC address is >> initialized to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff and it causes the following >> warning: >> >> Warning: smc911x-0 MAC addresses don't match: >> Address in SROM is ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >> Address in environment is 00:01:ba:dc:0d:03 >> >> Set dev->enetaddr only if MAC address is valid, and thus avoid the >> above case. > > someone already posted a patch for this issue: > NET: Fix MAC addr handling for smc911x > > i think the approach they took is better -- they check for explicit values > that indicate 'no srom is attached' rather than 'is the mac valid' as your > code could ignore attached srom's but bad addresses. in this latter case, i > think we want the warning. agree > -mike -- Sincerely yours, Mike.